Prediction of Critical Illness During Out-of-Hospital Emergency Care

CONTEXT: Early identification of nontrauma patients in need of critical care services in the emergency setting may improve triage decisions and facilitate regionalization of critical care. OBJECTIVES: To determine the out-of-hospital clinical predictors of critical illness and to characterize the performance of a simple score for out-of-hospital prediction of development of critical illness during hospitalization. DESIGN AND SETTING: Population-based cohort study of an emergency medical services (EMS) system in greater King County, Washington (excluding metropolitan Seattle), that transports to 16 receiving facilities. PATIENTS: Nontrauma, non-cardiac arrest adult patients transported to a hospital by King County EMS from 2002 through 2006. Eligible records with complete data (N = 144,913) were linked to hospital discharge data and randomly split into development (n = 87,266 [60%]) and validation (n = 57,647 [40%]) cohorts. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Development of critical illness, defined as severe sepsis, delivery of mechanical ventilation, or death during hospitalization. RESULTS: Critical illness occurred during hospitalization in 5% of the development (n = 4835) and validation (n = 3121) cohorts. Multivariable predictors of critical illness included older age, lower systolic blood pressure, abnormal respiratory rate, lower Glasgow Coma Scale score, lower pulse oximetry, and nursing home residence during out-of-hospital care (P < .01 for all). When applying a summary critical illness prediction score to the validation cohort (range, 0-8), the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.77 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76-0.78), with satisfactory calibration slope (1.0). Using a score threshold of 4 or higher, sensitivity was 0.22 (95% CI, 0.20-0.23), specificity was 0.98 (95% CI, 0.98-0.98), positive likelihood ratio was 9.8 (95% CI, 8.9-10.6), and negative likelihood ratio was 0.80 (95% CI, 0.79- 0.82). A threshold of 1 or greater for critical illness improved sensitivity (0.98; 95% CI, 0.97-0.98) but reduced specificity (0.17; 95% CI, 0.17-0.17). CONCLUSIONS: In a population-based cohort, the score on a prediction rule using out-of-hospital factors was significantly associated with the development of critical illness during hospitalization. This score requires external validation in an independent populationPeer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/85143/1/Seymour - JAMA-2010-747-54.pdf11

A retrospective study on the effects of illness severity and atrial fibrillation on outcomes in the intensive care unit

Introduction: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is common in patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) and has been associated with worse outcomes. However, it is unclear whether AF itself adds to the risk of death or is merely a marker of illness severity. We aimed to record the incidence and outcomes of all patients with different categories of AF and determine whether AF was an independent predictor of death.&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt; Methods: This retrospective cohort study was undertaken in the ICU of a tertiary-referral university hospital. Category of AF, sex, C-reactive protein (CRP) level, APACHE II score, predicted hospital mortality and survival outcomes were analysed from 1084 records. Percentages, medians and interquartile ranges were used to describe the sample. Chi-square test and the non-parametric Mann–Whitney U test were used, as appropriate, for statistical analysis. Logistic regression analyses were performed to evaluate the association of AF with death in the ICU adjusting for age, sex, CRP level and APACHE II score.&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt; Results: Overall, 13.6% of patients developed new-onset AF during their critical illness, while 4.3% had a pre-existing history. The hospital mortality rate was higher in those with AF compared with those without (47.9% vs. 30.9%, p&lt;0.001) and higher in those with newly diagnosed AF compared with those with a prior history (53.1% vs. 31.9%, p=0.012). CRP levels were higher in those with AF (p&lt;0.001) compared with those without and higher in those with newly diagnosed AF compared with those with a prior history (p=0.012). On multivariate logistic regression analysis, only the APACHE II score was found to be an independent predictor of death.&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt; Conclusion: Despite the higher mortality rate in patients with AF, the APACHE II score was the only independent predictor of death within the ICU. Prospective studies are required to explore the apparently reduced risk of dying among those with a prior history of AF.&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt

Feasibility of the modified sequential organ function assessment score in a resource-constrained setting: a prospective observational study.

BackgroundSub-Saharan Africa has a great burden of critical illness with limited health care resources. We evaluated the feasibility and utility of the modified Sequential Organ Function Assessment (mSOFA) score in assessing morbidity and mortality in the National Referral Hospital's intensive care unit (ICU) for one year.MethodsWe conducted a prospective, observational cohort study on patients above 12 years of age admitted to the ICU at Mulago Hospital (Kampala, Uganda). All SOFA scores were determined at admission and at 48 h. We modified the SOFA score by replacing the PaO2/FiO2 ratio with SPO2/FiO2. The primary outcome was ICU mortality.ResultsThis ICU cohort of 118 patients had a mean age of 37 years and an ICU mortality rate of 46.6%. Non-survivors had higher initial (7.7 SD 3.8 vs. 5.5 SD 3.3; p = 0.007), mean (8.1 SD 3.9 vs 4.7 SD 2.6; p &lt; 0.001) and highest mSOFA scores (9.4 SD 4.2 vs. 5.8 SD 3.2; p &lt; 0.001), with an increase of 1.0 (SD 3.1) mSOFA on average after 48 h when compared to survivors (p &lt; 0.001). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curves for each mSOFA category was: initial-0.68, mean-0.76, highest-0.76 and delta mSOFA-0.74. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed no significant association between mSOFA scores and mortality.ConclusionOur results confirm that calculation of the mSOFA score is feasible for an ICU population in a resource-limited country. More data are needed to test for an association between mSOFA and mortality

The comparative clinical course of pregnant and non-pregnant women hospitalised with influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 infection

Introduction: The Influenza Clinical Information Network (FLU-CIN) was established to gather detailed clinical and epidemiological information about patients with laboratory confirmed A(H1N1)pdm09 infection in UK hospitals. This report focuses on the clinical course and outcomes of infection in pregnancy.Methods: A standardised data extraction form was used to obtain detailed clinical information from hospital case notes and electronic records, for patients with PCR-confirmed A(H1N1)pdm09 infection admitted to 13 sentinel hospitals in five clinical 'hubs' and a further 62 non-sentinel hospitals, between 11th May 2009 and 31st January 2010.Outcomes were compared for pregnant and non-pregnant women aged 15-44 years, using univariate and multivariable techniques.Results: Of the 395 women aged 15-44 years, 82 (21%) were pregnant; 73 (89%) in the second or third trimester. Pregnant women were significantly less likely to exhibit severe respiratory distress at initial assessment (OR?=?0.49 (95% CI: 0.30-0.82)), require supplemental oxygen on admission (OR?=?0.40 (95% CI: 0.20-0.80)), or have underlying co-morbidities (p-trend &lt;0.001). However, they were equally likely to be admitted to high dependency (Level 2) or intensive care (Level 3) and/or to die, after adjustment for potential confounders (adj. OR?=?0.93 (95% CI: 0.46-1.92). Of 11 pregnant women needing Level 2/3 care, 10 required mechanical ventilation and three died.Conclusions: Since the expected prevalence of pregnancy in the source population was 6%, our data suggest that pregnancy greatly increased the likelihood of hospital admission with A(H1N1)pdm09. Pregnant women were less likely than non-pregnant women to have respiratory distress on admission, but severe outcomes were equally likely in both groups

Predicting death and readmission after intensive care discharge

Background: Despite initial recovery from critical illness, many patients deteriorate after discharge from the intensive care unit (ICU). We examined prospectively collected data in an attempt to identify patients at risk of readmission or death after intensive care discharge. Methods: This was a secondary analysis of clinical audit data from patients discharged alive from a mixed medical and surgical (non-cardiac) ICU. Results: Four hundred and seventy-five patients (11.2%) died in hospital after discharge from the ICU. Increasing age, time in hospital before intensive care admission, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) score, and discharge Therapeutic Intervention Scoring System (TISS) score were independent risk factors for death after intensive care discharge. Three hundred and eighty-five patients (8.8%) were readmitted to intensive care during the same hospital admission. Increasing age, time in hospital before intensive care, APACHE II score, and discharge to a high dependency unit were independent risk factors for readmission. One hundred and forty-three patients (3.3%) were readmitted within 48 h of intensive care discharge. APACHE II scores and discharge to a high dependency or other ICU were independent risk factors for early readmission. The overall discriminant ability of our models was moderate with only marginal benefit over the APACHE II scores alone. Conclusions: We identified risk factors associated with death and readmission to intensive care. It was not possible to produce a definitive model based on these risk factors for predicting death or readmission in an individual patient.Not peer reviewedAuthor versio

Development and Initial Validation of a Questionnaire to Measure Health-Related Quality of Life of Adults with Common Variable Immune Deficiency: The CVID_QoL Questionnaire.

BACKGROUND: Generic health status quality of life (QoL) instruments have been used in patients with common variable immune deficiency (CVID). However, by their nature, these tools may over- or underestimate the impact of diseases on an individual's QoL. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to develop and validate a questionnaire to measure specific-health-related QoL for adults with CVID (CVID_QoL). METHODS: The 32-item content of the CVID_QoL questionnaire was developed using focus groups and individual patient interviews. Validation studies included 118 adults with CVID who completed Short Form-36, Saint George Respiratory Questionnaire, General Health Questionnaire-12, and EuroQol-5D questionnaire in a single session. Principal component and factor analysis solutions identified 3 scores to be similar in number and content for each solution. Validation of 3 factor scores was performed by construct validity. Reproducibility, reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant validity were evaluated. Matrices consisting of correlations between the 32 items in the CVID_QOL were calculated. RESULTS: Factor analysis identified 3 dimensions: emotional functioning (EF), relational functioning (RF), and gastrointestinal and skin symptoms (GSS). The instrument had good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha, min. 0.74 for GSS, max. 0.84 for RF, n = 118) and high reproducibility (intraclass correlation coefficient, min. 0.79 for RF, max 0.90 for EF, n = 27). EF and RF scores showed good convergent validity correlating with conceptually similar dimensions of other study scales. Acute and relapsing infections had a significant impact on EF and RF. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence of the reliability and construct validity of the CVID_QoL to identify QoL issues in patients with CVID that may not be addressed by generic instruments

From representing views to representativeness of views: illustrating a new (Q2S) approach in the context of health care priority setting in nine European countries

Governments across Europe are required to make decisions about how best to allocate scarce health care resources. There are legitimate arguments for eliciting societal vales in relation to health care resource allocation given the roles of the general public as payers and potential patients. However, relatively little is known about the views of the general public on general principles which could guide these decisions. In this paper we present five societal viewpoints on principles for health care resources allocation and develop a new approach, Q2S, designed to investigate the extent to which these views are held across a range of European countries. An online survey was developed, based on a previously completed study Q methodology, and delivered between November 2009 and February 2010 across nine countries to 33,515 respondents. The largest proportion of our respondents (44%), were found to most associate themselves with an egalitarian perspective. Differences in views were more strongly associated with countries than with socio-demographic characteristics. These results provide information which could be useful for decision makers in understanding the pluralistic context in which they are making health care resource allocation decisions and how different groups in society may respond to such decisions